… (trying to catch breath)… … Oh-dear-lord… … Hold on a sec… … Holy hell… … (deeeep breath)… Okay… Almost got it… … (snortle)… Okay, I think I’m good now… (hiccup)… Okay, okay… Uh… (cough-cough)… You ARE aware, I hope, that all that “government help” comes out of the pockets of the tax-paying citizens, right? That means that every person paying taxes is basically a SLAVE to paying money to help support the child/children of parents who are using welfare. And while I am indeed most grateful the we had that resource when I was a kid, my Mom and Grandparents used it as little as possible, and then got away from it altogether as soon as possible. And while I am indeed happy to help those in legitimate need, I absolutely RESENT WITH A PASSION having my tax money being spent on those who REFUSE to take responsibility for their own life decisions. But, hey, you do you, Boo-boo.
That time the emojis weren’t used ridiculously, at least.
Yes.
No. That would be the same as saying that they would be slaves for paying taxes that fund schools…schools help direct the future, and the children are the future - if everyone helps them, then they are supporting the future generation. There’s a difference between supporting the children and supporting the mother. I only think the money should be directed towards the kids - the mother/father gets none of it.
It is not the job of individuals, but the job of the many.
That’s why I said it’s possible for me to get out of it, if I manage to earn some money. I’m not lazy; but I would not be ready to take care of the child just yet. And until I was able to support it myself, I would need a little assistance.
Like I said, trying to get a way to support myself and the child without using that, as soon as possible.
Naive much?.. (face palm)…
How am I being naive?
Find a “study” about it to read. I’m sure you will be an expert on it in no time flat.
Speaking of which, I find it incredibly curious how you start a couple of threads asking for advice and input on a couple of serious topics. But, then, you pretty much totally dismiss any input from experienced individuals because YOU already know everything better than the experienced individuals because you read a few studies. Fascinating… 
Probably over 500 studies AT LEAST, but sure. “…a few.”
Also, I try to get as many studies as I can on a subject, I don’t like when it’s just one…
Also, I would like to point out that pointing out what is wrong with something is not a problem. I am a skeptic, afterall. And I don’t dismiss - I criticize the parts I view to be wrong.
So, you don’t like studies, you don’t like research, you don’t like science. Sorry to break it to you, but studies discover medicine, they discover cures, they discover vaccines - how is rates of DV different? Just because it’s a different subject - does that suddenly make it wrong? Is science suddenly no longer valid?
Also, for the one on thousands of individuals…my AT LEAST over 500 studies have well over 300,000 total participants, probably more since it was only over 200 that had over 300,000.
Well, I honestly don’t like doing research. I leave that to my wife. She loves it.
Studies I can take or leave, depending on the subject. Some are interesting. Some might as well be fiction. It varies.
But science? Wow… I never knew I didn’t like science. Just now learned that, thanks to you. Now that I DO know, however, YOOOO-HOOOOO! 
FIRST thing I’m gonna do tomorrow is go out and break that damn Law of Gravity. Maybe even start a revolution against it. “Down with gravity,” will be our battle cry! STUPID SCIENCE!
Perhaps I should rephrase. If you refuse to acknowledge the reality that studies show, if you refuse to look or just downplay, then you are ignoring science. There, is that better?
Neither are women. They work and contribute to society (pay taxes). BTW, those that are not raising their child/ren also pay child-support. They are also just as financially responsible.
YES
A baby and the life-long care of another person is daunting and rewarding. Quite frankly, you are no where near the task of raising a baby. You have no idea of what lies ahead and a baby is not something you just drag through life. It seems you don’t know how to be held accountable or responsible for decisions and you don’t have the ability to hold others accountable or responsible. Choosing to keep a pregnancy 
is not being responsible for a life if you cannot support that life after birth. The government isn’t “free money” nor is it the government’s responsibility to be your “partner” in raising a child. Thankfully you do live in a country that does care and does offer supports for citizens that have transitional needs.
Without family, no plan for monetary supports, no job or housing, no “involvement” from the bio-father (and no accountability), I really do not understand why you are placing this on yourself except for a desire for someone to love you (baby). Uh, babies are demanding and selfish - they do not understand or co-operate…and those are babies that do not have colic or other health issues. They suck you dry mentally and physically. Your time will never be your own unless your plan also includes neglect.
I sincerely care about your future. And I’m an old fart who has been around the block and have a very good idea how things play out. I will respect your decisions, but I really believe you are making a terrible mistake that will have a very severe negative impact that will cripple you for the rest of your life.
I need a study to support that assertion.
I want ALL child support to end. Did I stutter?
[quote=“Whitefire13, post:89, topic:2415”]
No.
Ok. I would know, this is a bit scary so far. I’m not prepared, I know. But I would never be able to carry out an abortion or give it up for adoption. It would kill me to do so.
I made a bad choice to have sex as a teenager and not start off with a condom. He offered, I accepted. I have chosen to raise the child. I have chosen to take responsibility for this child; no one else chose it. I should not force this decision on anyone else.
And, like I said, that’s what I’m aiming for.
Tried to get a job, at first they tried to pressure me into getting one, and now won’t even let me try.
I hope he gets involved, but that’s his choice.
It’s because if I do an abortion or give it up for adoption, it will literally kill me.
I know.
I agree with the co-operate, but considering that they have to LEARN inorder to survive, I’d say they have the ability to understand at least some stuff. Like “fire is hot” or “stove is hot.”
Hopefully never “tv is heavy” or “tv does squash.”
I know. My sister had (and still has) some problems.
Who said I was planning on having time for myself? If there’s a child, I’m willing to keep it occupied.
I also know that you have to keep cuddling with them and the like - a baby that gets no contact from it’s parents will die.
Possibly. Possibly not. All things are a probability until they happen. It’s not set in stone - but it’s a likely future, based on others. I understand this. But I cannot, in my ethics and morals, force another person into being a parent or supporting a child. I would also say when a child is possibly not there’s, but unless someone had sex with me while I slept, then it would be him.
I’m glad of your concern, to be honest. I’m actually really glad of it. So, thank you. But I know what I’m going to do, at least for this, and that’s not take child support. I know you’re trying to help, and I’m really grateful for that. But I cannot take child support. I’m sorry.
Ok. Here.
Oh, apparently it was updated since the last time I looked? So even MORE studies and participants…
Fiebert, Marty. References Examining Assaults by Women on Their Spouses or Male Partners: An Updated Annotated Bibliography (2014). (1) (PDF) References Examining Assaults by Women on Their Spouses or Male Partners: An Updated Annotated Bibliography (2014) | Marty Fiebert - Academia.edu.
You can get the paper for free by downloading just the paper, and not downloading the entire package.
Abstract [bold not added] This annotated bibliography describes 343 scholarly investigations (270 empirical studies and 73 reviews) [bold, italics added] demonstrating that women are as physically aggressive as men (or more) in their relationships with their spouses or opposite-sex partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 440,850 people. [bold, italics added]
Is that enough for you, or do you need more?
Cause I can get you some more studies.
4 significant figures?!? Bullshit!
The ratio you described as almost equal was greater than 25%.
We don’t need any more misrepresentation of studies, imo.
A while ago, I found a 2018 Pew Research statistic that found that almost 40% were male…I could only find the 2015 one this time. I apologize. I wrote it ahead of time, so I wasn’t able to write it according to the information I could find currently. Perhaps I can find the 2018 statistic soon. I would also like to point out that the 2019 graph I provided was nearly 50-50 for men and women.
Are you looking at week-ends or week-days? Because week-days was 32.26% male (67.64% female), while week-ends was 40% male (60% female). Week-days had a gap of 35.38%, while weekends had a gap of 20%. I don’t think you looked at the one I was talking about, week-ends, which is still closer to 50-50 than the weekdays.
They won’t be a misrepresentation. I apologize for the other one, as I did not get the right source for my data, so I shall correct that source and get my information from the right sources.
I support pro-choice decisions when it comes to a woman’s reproductive rights.
I do hope that it works out for you.
Show how you got that number.
Why does the weekday statistic have 4 significant figures, while the weekend has 2?
My complaint wasn’t about the source, or the date.
Thank you. I hope it works too.
Well, let’s see.
Let me introduce you to a little thing called “math.” It’s a very useful friend.
Week-day: 2.1 + 1.0 = 3.1 | 1.0 / 3.1 = 0.3225806451612903 * 100 = 32.25806451612903 or 32.26% rounded. ||| 2.1 / 3.1 = 0.6774193548387097 * 100 = 67.74193548387097 or 67.74% rounded. So, 32.26% male and 67.74% female. 32.26 - 67.74 = -35.48%. So, a gap of 35.48%.
Week-end: 1.5 + 1.1 = 2.6 | 1.1 / 2.6 = 0.4230769230769231 * 100 = 42.30769230769231 or 42.31% (oops, looks like I accidentally under-counted the male number. Apologies.) | 1.5 / 2.6 = 0.5769230769230769 * 100 = 57.69230769230769 or 57.69% rounded. So, 42.31% male and 57.69% female. 42.31 - 57.69 = -15.38. So, a gap of 15.38%. Looks I accidentally UNDER-counted the male number the first time. Apologies.
Again, I got the wrong year for the statistic I was citing, as I meant for the year 2018 to be almost 40%. I’ll try to find that one if I can. I know I did once before. But then again I haven’t found another statistic that I was looking for (unrelated), so it’s possible that it may take me some time to fetch it for you.
Well, that was my mistake. So I apologized for my mistake. Take it or leave it, your choice.
Notice how the 20% doesn’t appear in any of your calculation? So I’ll ask again: how did you get that 20% value you cited earlier?
Why don’t you read what I said accidentally earlier:
The first time, I accidentally under-counted the male number; I apologized for my mistake. Take it or leave it.
Because what you wrote was so fucked I couldn’t tell that 15.38% was supposed to be the 20% you cited earlier.